The Chicken or the Egg, Which Came First?

[Lord_Drakonus]

Personally, I think this question is very stupid. Nothing came first. It all happened over the course of millions of years.

Evolution turned the not-chicken into the chicken over the course of millions of years. There's no egg or chicken that came first, because genetically, at what point did the not-chicken became the chicken?

The most logical answer would be the egg. But that poses a lot of other questions as well.

If it became the chicken we know today when it was in the egg, then doesn't that mean that the parent was already a chicken genetically? Doesn't that mean that the parent should be considered as a chicken, since the off-spring's DNA didn't change much from the parent?

And here's the confusing part, there're hundreds of chicken species that evolved separately around the world. Sure they had a common ancestor, but that common ancestor was a bird that was also a common ancestor to ducks and other birds.

 

[SailusGebel]

The Internet or the Trolls, Which Came First?

 

[Internet-Degenerate]

The rooster came first into the chicken, who later laid the egg.

Debate settled, where's my Nobel Prize?

 

[Lord_Drakonus]

The rooster came first into the chicken, who later laid the egg.

Debate settled, where's my Nobel Prize?

Nah, that rooster got cucked by his brother who came before he even noticed.

 

[hauntedwritings]

If the question is refering to just eggs in general, then he answer is the egg. Explanation being that a lot of different species have laid eggs over the course of history, long before the species we now call chickens existed. But that might be a boring explanation, since it's called 'the chicken and the egg', not 'the snake and the egg', or anything else.

Personally, I think this question is very stupid. Nothing came first. It all happened over the course of millions of years.

Evolution turned the not-chicken into the chicken over the course of millions of years. There's no egg or chicken that came first, because genetically, at what point did the not-chicken became the chicken?

The most logical answer would be the egg. But that poses a lot of other questions as well.

If it became the chicken we know today when it was in the egg, then doesn't that mean that the parent was already a chicken genetically? Doesn't that mean that the parent should be considered as a chicken, since the off-spring's DNA didn't change much from the parent?

And here's the confusing part, there're hundreds of chicken species that evolved separately around the world. Sure they had a common ancestor, but that common ancestor was a bird that was also a common ancestor to ducks and other birds.

If we strictly talk about chickens and chicken eggs, then we'd follow the line of logic you've presented. The differentiating factor then comes from where we draw the line of when does something become classified a new species?

Evolution occurs as known, through mutations in an individual specimen prior to it's birth. That means, at some point, enough mutations hadn't occured for the parent to no longer be classified a chicken. But that bird then laid an egg, which then had the mutation that would become called today's chicken when hatched. This is of course in simplified terms, as the difference should be so small we would see little or no difference. But long story short: The egg came first.

The flaw in this logic however is that we can't really classify a difference in species merely by comparing two consecutive generations (other than in the case of crossbreeding). It takes thousands of generations, with a lot of mutations over the course of possibly millions of years, before we declare two species as different.

Furthermore, the genetical differences between the sexes of a species tends to be greater than any plausible number of mutations that occurs between two (or more) consecutive generations. So it's more plausible to, in this case, say that the two sexes are two different species. (Which hey, we already knew.)

So sadly, if you try to stay strictly to chicken eggs, the logic will probably fail to give you a consistent answer. So we have to fall back on our boring answer, or simply acknowledge that a paradox should simply be treated as a paradox.

 

[Lloyd]

The chicken came first.

 

[Candy_Man]

I can get sciency with the topic of speciation and all. However, I like to think that a dinosaur laid an egg and a chicken came out, which means that the egg came first. Foolproof theory.

 

[AliceShiki]

Obviously the chicken was born out of outer space energies first, as we needed to eat friend chicken first, before we could be allowed to taste the joys of fried eggs~

 

[Underload]

First came Gandalf with his brown old wand. He used the wand and squirted his magic all over some earthy beings. Birthing the world as you know it.

 

[Nekroz]

The chicken.

 

[K5Rakitan]

The Internet or the Trolls, Which Came First?

Trolls for sure. The internet just gave us a more secure, anonymous outlet for trolling.
Ask me about the "Dear Mommy" notes I left all over Girl Scout Camp!

Nah, that rooster got cucked by his brother who came before he even noticed.

Did someone say . . . BROTHER

 

[Deleted member 45782]

The dino came first.

 

[morhamza]

You know what is funny? The inspiration for my story eternal was drawn from this question and applied to something else. God or the universe, which came first. If God created the Universe, who created God, and where did God exist before the universe was made?
My readers probably don't know that though. Lol, they think Lycans are the main villain. Hehehehehe. They are in for a wild ride.
(Yes, this is shameless self-promo, sue me).

 

[Lord_Drakonus]

(Yes, this is shameless self-promo, sue me).

Nah, I'm not gonna sue you for that. Btw here's my series: https://www.scribblehub.com/series/180246/wormhole-to-another-world/

Shameless self-promo? Two can play at that game!

 

[SailusGebel]

Trolls for sure. The internet just gave us a more secure, anonymous outlet for trolling.
Ask me about the "Dear Mommy" notes I left all over Girl Scout Camp!

Did someone say . . . BROTHER

Okay. I'm asking you about "Dear Mommy" notes.

 

[BenJepheneT]

I mean, the chicken HAD to come to fertilize the egg, so I'd say the former.

 

[Herz]

If the question is refering to just eggs in general, then he answer is the egg. Explanation being that a lot of different species have laid eggs over the course of history, long before the species we now call chickens existed. But that might be a boring explanation, since it's called 'the chicken and the egg', not 'the snake and the egg', or anything else.



If we strictly talk about chickens and chicken eggs, then we'd follow the line of logic you've presented. The differentiating factor then comes from where we draw the line of when does something become classified a new species?

Evolution occurs as known, through mutations in an individual specimen prior to it's birth. That means, at some point, enough mutations hadn't occured for the parent to no longer be classified a chicken. But that bird then laid an egg, which then had the mutation that would become called today's chicken when hatched. This is of course in simplified terms, as the difference should be so small we would see little or no difference. But long story short: The egg came first.

The flaw in this logic however is that we can't really classify a difference in species merely by comparing two consecutive generations (other than in the case of crossbreeding). It takes thousands of generations, with a lot of mutations over the course of possibly millions of years, before we declare two species as different.

Furthermore, the genetical differences between the sexes of a species tends to be greater than any plausible number of mutations that occurs between two (or more) consecutive generations. So it's more plausible to, in this case, say that the two sexes are two different species. (Which hey, we already knew.)

So sadly, if you try to stay strictly to chicken eggs, the logic will probably fail to give you a consistent answer. So we have to fall back on our boring answer, or simply acknowledge that a paradox should simply be treated as a paradox.

I agree with your explanation. Anyway, if I remember correctly, a being is deemed to be from a different species if it can't reproduce successfully with the other representatives of the species it evolved from. For example, the fertilization is unsuccessful, or their offspring is sterile, etc. Of course in nature, new species appear only after a long period of inbreeding in a closed-off population.

 

[K5Rakitan]

Okay. I'm asking you about "Dear Mommy" notes.

I would write ridiculous things on little slips of paper that always started with, "Dear Mommy," and leave them wherever I could all over camp. I'd just have to make sure nobody was watching when I dropped one, so they ended up in bathrooms a lot. I had so much fun with them that I started typing them in advance so I wouldn't risk anyone recognizing my handwriting. I got caught anyway, unfortunately.

Dear Mommy,
The other kids laugh at me because I still wear potty pants.

Dear Mommy,
I found a hair growing in my no-no place.

 

[AliceShiki]

I got caught anyway, unfortunately.

Sad... T.T

At least you had your fun though~

 

[Icanica]

The self-replicating protocell or if you prefer the first self-replicating molecules in the primordial ooze some 3 billion years ago.